The spirit of Bill Leak lives on in 18C amendments

Welcome to the latest version of Australian culture wars. This time the spirit of Bill Leak, the late, wonderful cartoonist for The Australian, hangs over the battlefield.

The fact Leak spent so many of the last months of his life having to deal with the Human Rights Commission over one of his cartoons gives new impetus and political cover to the Government's move to change the racial discrimination act to prevent any repeat of such absurdity.

But there's still been years of Liberal Party angst and external pressure on the government on this issue. Malcolm Turnbull now says it's important to get the balance right between protecting the value of free speech and protection against hate speech based on race.

So the Liberals, over some Coalition MP's complaints, will remove the vaguer words in Section 18C of the racial discrimination act – "offend, insult, humiliate" – and insert "harass". The notion of outlawing intimidation stays.

The government will also introduce the standard of a "reasonable member of the Australian community" for judging any breach. That's as opposed to the arcane processes of the commission as led by Gillian Triggs.

Related Quotes

Company Profile

Turnbull claims this strengthens race hate laws by making the wording of the law clearer and more effective.

Many won't be happy

But many people will be highly sceptical if not antagonistic, a particular problem for Liberals in marginal electorates with large ethnic populations. Labor's attacks have already begun, backed by the outrage expressed by various community and ethnic lobby groups.

"They believe that Australia is a nation of racists, only held in check by Gillian Triggs and Section 18C," Turnbull told parliament. "We have more respect for the Australian people than the Labor Party does.

"The suggestion those people who support a change to 18C are racist is deeply offensive."

Certainly the belief any amendment of the racial discrimination act can only encourage race hate speech reflects a uniquely Australian sensitivity – if not paranoia.

Even the Government's proposals retain far more curbs on free speech than the First Amendment rights that apply in the US, for example, and which guarantees freedom of expression from any government restrictions. This has a deep philosophical basis in the history and culture of the US, of course.

But such legal infringements on free speech have never been regarded as acceptable despite America being the most litigious society in the world and one also proudly based on an immigrant cultural background.

Hard sell...for this government

In Australia, the message is still likely to prove a hard sell for a Government so often inept at seizing the political initiative and persuasively explaining its agenda and direction.

Labor wanted to point out the irony of the change approved by the Liberals on Harmony Day, with the Opposition repeatedly asking Turnbull just what he wanted people to be allowed to say they could not say now.

"I have no doubt the Labor Party will cynically and ruthlessly seek to exploit these changes," the Prime Minister declared. No doubt.

After Labor's assault and under pressure from his own backbench and community groups, Tony Abbott as Prime Minister reluctantly backed off his promised amendments to 18C that had been triggered by the successful prosecution of columnist Andrew Bolt.

During the last election campaign, Abbott's successor as PM was even less inclined to see change to the act as a priority. There were no such plans, Turnbull insisted, talking instead about the Government not being distracted from its focus on jobs and growth.

This message not only didn't appeal to voters in general. It didn't reduce the internal pressure about 18C from many on the right of the party – a group a weakened Prime Minister knows he has to manage carefully.

Appeasing the right

"This is not about free speech but about the Prime Minister appeasing his party," Bill Shorten insisted.

That's why the issue was referred, post-election, to a joint parliamentary committee. The committee report in February couldn't agree on much of anything other than reforming some commission processes to make it easier to terminate unjustified complaints.

That should help in a practical way. In addition to the harassment of Bill Leak, the protracted, disgraceful pursuit of the Queensland University of Technology students should never have been allowed under any "reasonable person" standard.

Such a "case" would now become much harder to drag out given the increased guidelines on quickly throwing out unmeritorious cases. Those facing a complaint would also receive the early notification not provided to the QUT students until far too late.

"What we are delivering is a stronger and fairer section," Turnbull said. "A section that will do a better job at protecting Australians against racial vilification and at the same time ensure that university students aren't hauled through the courts for years for putting posts on Facebook and that cartoonists like the great late Bill Leak don't have to look over their shoulder to see if there is a commission or a lawyer waiting to pounce on them."

These changes won't entirely satisfy those who passionately believe in protecting free speech as an enduring value and principle vital to any healthy democracy. Some call the amendments a "compromise" rather than Turnbull's preferred terminology of balance.

It's still a compromise unlikely to satisfy some of the cross bench of the Senate, along with Labor and the Greens. The probable support of Pauline Hanson and her One Nation colleagues won't be enough without the backing of several more cross benchers, including the Nick Xenophon group.

But the Prime Minister, who usually faces the potent criticism that no-one knows what he stands for, will now argue his willingness to stand on principle and for Liberal "values" rather than victimhood. He just needs to persuade the public the spirit of Bill Leak lives on.